Complex Systems Analysis-A Necessary Tool for Homeland Security

Key Points

Many of the threats the United States faces, and
many of the means available to counter them,
are embedded in webs of complex systems
that surround everyday life—from the transportation
networks that move goods and people
to the electrical grids that power the nation.

The responsibilities of the Department of Homeland
Security include making the complex systems
that support the country more resilient to
natural or man-made disasters and preventing
terrorist exploitation of these systems.

Complex systems are extremely difficult to
analyze, so understanding how they function,
predicting their behavior, or determining
the optimum means for changing their
performance represents a unique challenge.

Countering threats to complex systems
requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary,
and multi-layered approach. The Department
of Homeland Security must become a national
leader in developing and exploiting means of
complex systems analysis and using that
analysis to inform its policies and programs.

Key Points

Many of the threats the United States faces, and
many of the means available to counter them,
are embedded in webs of complex systems
that surround everyday life—from the transportation
networks that move goods and people
to the electrical grids that power the nation.

The responsibilities of the Department of Homeland
Security include making the complex systems
that support the country more resilient to
natural or man-made disasters and preventing
terrorist exploitation of these systems.

Complex systems are extremely difficult to
analyze, so understanding how they function,
predicting their behavior, or determining
the optimum means for changing their
performance represents a unique challenge.

Countering threats to complex systems
requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary,
and multi-layered approach. The Department
of Homeland Security must become a national
leader in developing and exploiting means of
complex systems analysis and using that
analysis to inform its policies and programs.

About the Authors

James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.Vice President for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, and the E. W. Richardson Fellow

As President Barack Obama rightly noted in one of his first
directives, his "highest priority is to keep the American people
safe."[1] Addressing homeland security challenges
effectively requires understanding them. Many of the threats the
United States faces, and many of the means available to counter
them, are embedded in webs of complex systems that surround
everyday life-from the transportation networks that move goods and
people to the electrical grids that power the nation.

Understanding how complex systems perform is a vital component
of homeland security. The responsibilities of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) include making the complex systems that
support the country more resilient in the face of natural or
man-made disasters; preventing terrorist exploitation of the
systems that support society; and advancing security measures in a
manner that encourages healthy and stable global systems-which
promote economic growth and protect individual liberties. In order
to address the myriad challenges in managing complex systems, DHS
requires centers of excellence proficient in complex systems
analysis, as well as a more direct method of translating analysis
into effective recommendations and policies.

Understanding Complex Systems

A system is "any set of regularly interacting factors and
activities that has definable boundaries and that produces
measurable outputs."[2] The complexity of a system is determined by
the number and diversity of interacting components. When systems
become overly complex, their behavior cannot be easily predicted by
traditional methods of analysis: breaking a system into its
component parts and analyzing elements in detail.[3]

In a complex system, elements are so interconnected and their
relationship so multifaceted that their properties cannot be
properly understood without assessing their interrelationship with
each other as well as their relationship with the wider system and
its environment.[4] Financial systems offer a case in point. It
is often difficult, for instance, to appreciate the value of an
individual stock just by knowing its current price. On the other
hand, when the price of the stock is understood in relation to the
performance of the larger system (for example, the market-whether
the average price of stocks on the exchange are on a positive
trend, a bull market, or on a negative trend, a bear market), the
value of the stock takes on a more significant meaning. In
short, in a complex systems analysis, assessing individual
properties often requires mapping them according to their place in
the overall system.

Additionally, a complex system can exhibit properties that
cannot be understood by examining the system's individual
components. Complex systems exhibit patterns, outcomes, and
properties not present in any of their individual elements.
Analysts often describe the performance of large complex systems as
"nonlinear," meaning that how the system functions cannot
necessarily be derived just from understanding the sum of the
behavior of the many parts that compose the system.[5] Financial markets
again offer an example. Analysts can study all kinds of information
on the components of a market, from the monetary exchange rates to
interest charges, yet cannot accurately predict whether future
markets will be bullish or bearish.

Since complex systems are so much more difficult to analyze,
understanding how they work, predicting their behavior, or
determining the optimum means for changing their performance
presents a unique challenge. When the performance of systems
affects the security of the nation, the task can be particularly
daunting.

Complex Systems and National
Security

Most national security problems faced by policymakers today
involve attempting to understand, predict, or affect the behavior
of complex systems from border and immigration security to
financial markets to transnational terrorist organizations. Yet,
policymakers rarely fully comprehend the impact of their decisions
on the behavior of these systems. Rather than dealing with systems
as a whole, contemporary decision makers tend to concentrate their
choices on discrete activities that are easier to identify and
understand. There is a problem with that approach: The more complex
and disorganized the system, the more unpredictable effects the
discrete, uninformed, intuitive decisions of policymakers may have
on specific outcomes.

Failing to understand how discrete decisions have an impact on
the system as a whole can produce unintended and counterproductive
consequences. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, for example,
emergency officials barred all but authorized emergency responders
from entering New Orleans. As a result, fuel handlers who had not
been credentialed by state officials could not make necessary
deliveries to generator-powered emergency centers. Without gas or
fresh batteries, the centers lost power and became inoperable.
Since officials failed to understand how the entire system worked,
they fixed one problem, preventing unnecessary convergence at the
disaster scene, and created another- disabling key command and
control nodes.

System analysis for homeland security involves not only
protecting and using the systems that support American society, but
also gaining knowledge on how to attack the complex systems of
America's adversaries. Some terrorist groups, for instance, have
demonstrated tremendous capacity for adaptation. According to a
report by the Homeland Security Advisory Council, a terrorist group
can be "proactive, innovative, well-networked, flexible, patient,
young, [and] technologically savvy, and learns and adapts
continuously based upon both successful and failed operations
around the globe."[6] Some terrorist groups may not only be best
understood as complex systems; battling them may also require
understanding how these groups exploit other complex systems such
as the Internet.[7] Therefore, it is clear that the ability to
effectively analyze complex systems has utility both for
safeguarding against threats as well as mitigating or defeating
potential or existing dangers.

Mastering Complex Systems

Describing complex systems-how they work, what they produce-and
then applying various planning methods and choice models to
determine how the systems' performance can be changed is the task
of complex systems analysis. Until recently, researchers have
approached complex systems by means of traditional
analysis-breaking them down into their smaller constituent parts
and analyzing these in detail. Cell biologists studied organisms in
terms of how their component cell systems interact. Similarly,
engineers tried to understand how a vehicle operates by taking
apart all its individual components, analyzing their properties,
and reassembling the vehicle in a slightly altered way to observe
the effects on its performance.

The problems inherent in trying to analyze complex systems that
have many units and variables were initially ascribed to a lack of
information required to model or analyze the system. The working
assumption was that, as data collection and processing techniques
continued to improve, researchers would be able to develop superior
models for predicting their properties. But contemporary research
has demonstrated that these methods remain deficient because they
still offer oversimplified descriptions of system behavior. Simply
adding more data to the study of a complex system may not be
enough. In contrast, complex systems analysis tries to bridge the
gap between knowledge and understanding-of analysis and
synthesis-by exposing and studying interrelationships rather than
simply relying on linear chains of cause and effect.[8]

Complex systems have been studied in the natural world for the
past two decades. Ecologists have applied this type of analysis to
the life sciences using mathematical models to help understand what
drives large fluctuations in wildlife populations, and have used
computer models to establish the properties of small-scale systems
to identify emergent properties of molecules within cells.[9] Often
the complexity of the system of interest requires employing a
multidisciplinary approach that combines insights from several
scientific fields.

During the past decade, exploiting advances in mathematics and
computer simulations, analysts have employed complex systems
analysis extensively to human behavior in physical, economic, and
social systems.[10]

In order to gain an appreciation of the dynamics of a complex
system, analysts often use a model composed of "stock" and "flow"
diagrams. A "stock" represents an entity (for example, money)
accumulated over time. Stocks change through "flows." A flow is a
change in stock over time (for example, deposits and withdrawals
from a bank account).The relationships between stocks and flows in
a complex system are often depicted graphically through a network
of "nodes" and "links" that portray how entities in the system are
connected.[11]

Homeland Security and Systems
Analysis

Used properly, complex systems analysis can help counter this
limitation by alerting policymakers to unexpected outcomes of
interactions between discrete parts of a system, thereby allowing
them to anticipate and hedge against potential future national
security threats. In addition, complex systems analysis should help
counter the natural tendency of policymakers to dwell on their
daily inbox rather than consider deeper, more comprehensive
issues.

Among the many tasks suited to complex systems analysis could be
helping the Department of Homeland Security identify and protect
the nation's critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR).
America's critical infrastructures include those national economic
sectors that involve transportation, oil and gas, water,
electricity, emergency services, government, telecommunications,
and banking. Each of these infrastructures is related to all
others, and each plays a role in the success and the security of
the United States. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7
(HSPD-7), issued in December 2003, assigns the Secretary of
Homeland Security responsibility for coordinating national efforts
to strengthen the protection of the U.S. CIKR.[12]

DHS attempts to address these threats and vulnerabilities by
establishing priorities, goals, and requirements for CIKR
protection and then working with diverse public- and private-sector
partners to implement them. Through the federal grants, the
National Infrastructure Protection Plan, and other measures, DHS
supports such activities as hardening facilities against attack,
enhancing resiliency, developing active and passive
countermeasures, and bolstering cyber security. Strengthening CIKR
protection helps to deter attacks against these assets and
minimizes the adverse effects of any disruption in their
operation.

Complex systems analysis can help predict what might happen if
an attack or natural disaster disrupted a critical infrastructure,
especially its possible effects on other CIKR sectors that are part
of the same system. Through modeling, scenarios, and other analytic
tools employing complex systems analysis, DHS policymakers can
consider optimal protection, response, and consequence-management
strategies.

Some efforts have been made to apply complex systems to homeland
security issues. The Pacific Northwest Partnership for Regional
Infrastructure Security has held a series of exercises called "Blue
Cascades" that examines all the interdependencies of a
regional-wide failure of the electrical grid.

Indeed, the analysis of electric-power grids provides insightful
illustrations of how such processes might manifest themselves. Each
power line and each generator has a region in which it can
generally operate safely. For reasons of economics, operators tend
to run them close to their maximum safety margin rather than leave
more capacity unused. If the power load exceeds the margin, the
line can collapse. The power flow then redistributes itself
throughout the network, sometimes along preplanned routes,
sometimes more randomly. If this surge disables other lines,
cascading failures can occur, leading to large power outages.[13]

In the northeastern blackout of August 14, 2003, a minor
incident-the loss of a few power lines in Ohio that came into
contact with some trees- quickly cascaded into a massive power
outage due to these compounding effects, as the loss of these power
lines led to heavy loading on parallel lines, which soon collapsed
and dragged down other connected lines with them. In turn, the
failure of the power grid resulted in disruptions in interconnected
transportation, communications, and other related networks since
railways, airlines, gas stations, and oil refineries also suspended
operations. Phone lines were overwhelmed due to the high volume of
calls, while many radio and television stations went off the air.
In the end, the cascading crisis disrupted commercial and daily
activities in a large part of eastern Canada and the northeastern
United States. The aggregate losses from the outage are difficult
to calculate, but probably approached ten billion dollars despite
its lasting only a single day.[14]

Complex systems analysis warns that misguided efforts to
mitigate certain risks associated with small power failures can
increase the risk of large cascading failures. The risks of
blackout are interdependent. Cascading failures begin when one
component fails and then power is redistributed within the system
to other components, forcing them operate at higher loads. Once
this load reaches a certain point (criticality), that component is
more prone to failure. If it fails, the load will again be
redistributed to a smaller number of adjacent components, which
must then accept an even higher load, increasing the likelihood
they will fail as well as the likelihood of cascading failure in
which the entire power system collapses. In this light, if done
incorrectly, suppressing small blackouts can put the larger system
at risk of failure.[15]

Disaster Loops

In matters of homeland security, understanding complex systems
is particularly critical since many of the complex systems are
dependent on one another. Disrupting one could have a cascading
effect on others. Cyber disruption and power failures could
interact in a malicious feedback loop because physical and cyber
infrastructure has become an integrated complex system vulnerable
to single points of failure. A computer attack could disrupt the
electric power grid, which in turn would cause many computers to
shut down as soon as they exhausted any emergency backup power.
Similarly, a malicious programming command that exploited a dam's
control system in order to disable its operation could prevent it
from generating electricity and providing water for irrigation or
prevent the flooding of vulnerable communities and transportation
nodes. The combined reduction in power supplies and computer power
would weaken the ability of first responders to cope with the
emergency. The power reduction would also severely disrupt the
functioning of other critical interrelated infrastructure systems,
such as the communications and transportation sectors.

Failures in complex systems have been likened to forest fires.
In a forest, the more sparsely populated it is, the less likely it
is that a small fire, localized in a cluster of isolated trees,
would spread to the rest of the forest. But if the forest is filled
with several connected clusters of trees, a small fire at one end
of the forest is more likely to eventually consume the rest of the
forest. What begins as a relatively insignificant failure can,
quickly and without warning, cascade into a widespread disaster
that affects several types of infrastructures and multiple
jurisdictional boundaries.

Putting Complex Systems Analysis to
Work

Countering threats to complex systems requires a comprehensive,
multidisciplinary, and multi-layered approach. In order to do its
job right, the Department of Homeland Security must become a
national leader in developing and exploiting means of complex
systems analysis and using that analysis to inform its policies and
programs. Developing that capability must begin with deepening the
knowledge and expertise within the national homeland security
enterprise:

The Department of Homeland Security should develop
Complex Systems Analysis Centers of Excellence. The Department
directs three Federally Funded Research and Development Centers
(FFRDCs)-the Homeland Security Institute (HSI), the Homeland
Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute (SEDI), and
the National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center
(NBACC). HSI focuses on policy development, decision making,
analysis of alternative approaches, and evaluation of new ideas.
SEDI provides systems-engineering expertise and acquisition
strategy advice, while NBACC focuses on developing means to combat
bioterrorism. Each center should be required to develop expertise
in complex systems analysis and together form a consortium to serve
as DHS's center of excellence on complex systems analysis.

DHS should collaborate with Homeland Security Centers of
Excellence. Universities chosen by the DHS's Directorate for
Science and Technology through a competitive selection process
participate in the Homeland Security Centers of Excellence program.
The university centers bring together leading experts and
researchers to conduct multidisciplinary research and education on
a range of homeland security challenges from natural disasters to
border security. The Science and Technology Directorate should
ensure that the research agendas of these institutions advance
DHS's understanding and application of complex systems
analysis.

DHS should address complex systems analysis during the
Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR). Congress mandated
the QHSR to address future challenges to the Department of Homeland
Security.[16] The QHSR should establish the requirement
for developing a homeland security master plan for
institutionalizing multidisciplinary analysis, including expertise
in complex systems analysis in the national homeland security
enterprise.

DHS should integrate complex systems analysis into a net
assessment office. Net assessment, a widely used tool within
the intelligence community, complements and contributes to complex
systems analysis. Net assessment is based on the understanding that
all national security challenges are a series of actions and
counteractions between competitors.[17] The purpose of examining
these actions and counteractions is to assess how these
competitions could develop in the future. The Department of
Homeland Security has considered establishing an Office of Net
Assessment within its policy and planning directorate. This office
should include developing expertise in employing complex systems
analysis to develop policy recommendations.

DHS should add complex systems analysis to the Homeland
Security Professional Development Program.[18] Homeland
security needs the foundation of a professional development system
that will provide the cadre of leaders required to meet the demands
of the 21st century. This foundation must include education,
training assignments, and accreditation tools that can help develop
professionals for homeland security and other critical interagency
national security activities. Developing expertise in critical
systems and multidisciplinary analysis should be a core component
of any professional development curriculum. The government should
have a "brick and mortar" homeland security university dedicated to
teaching these and other essential national security management,
leadership, and decision-making skills.

Conclusion

The Department of Homeland Security requires a robust capacity
to conduct complex systems analysis and apply this knowledge to the
policies and programs that will keep the nation safe in the 21st
century. Taking the right steps now will make the department and
the national security enterprise over which it has stewardship the
right tools to face current and future threats.

James Jay Carafano,
Ph.D., is Assistant Director of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom
Davis Institute for International Studies and Senior Research
Fellow for National Security and Homeland Security in the Douglas
and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at The Heritage
Foundation. Richard Weitz, Ph.D., is Senior Fellow and Director of
the Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson
Institute.

About the Author

James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.Vice President for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, and the E. W. Richardson Fellow